I would like to take a moment to respond to your article and address each of the points you made:

1. The writ was distributed for conference, this is a true point.

2. When Ukraine has their election invaded by these SAME offenders, they did not have anything in their constitution regarding this issue, either. But both of our countries are based on the premise that the vote of the people is critical to the country’s democracy. We actually have MORE legal grounds than they did, and they were successful. Our Supreme Court most definitely has the ability to protect the right of citizens to vote and have their vote counted and to protect us from foreign invasion, which is the heart of our argument.

3. I do not disagree at all with your assessment of our pro se legal writing. In fact, I would say it is the extremely poor quality of the phrasing of the writ itself, as you noted, which has garnered the highest level of criticism. But remember, we are laypeople expressing ourselves. Since that time, we have obtained an attorney who has added a motion which I hope clarifies our desires.

4. Regarding that case where the correct candidate was put in office, justice was done and I would hope justice would be done here, too. A lot of people can surmise what the court would have done, but no case was filed. Opinions, everyone has one. Especially people who do nothing and have a lot of time to criticize “the man in the ring”.

5. Regarding the “legal gibberish”, I have NO disagreement with you on the initial document which was presented by pro se litigants. Again, the vast majority of criticism we have received is related to the poor quality of writing. However, the legal reason for the case and the subsequent motion requesting the Supreme Court to do the necessary investigation into the Russian interference are both sound.

6. Regarding the strength of our case: Many people have underestimated us throughout this procedure and we have overcome each issue. Many of them do not understand what we are doing and do not know what the responses and interactions have been. Some of our loudest critics have not even read the documents, nor spoken with our lawyer. We have much reason to believe that the defendants, the defendant’s families, the court, court staff, and citizens take this very seriously. I would hope after learning more, you will, too.

Let’s begin with the 4 reasons the Supreme Court might hear a case:
-If there is a conflict of law
-If it serves a particular justice’s interests
-If lower courts have ignored prior Supreme Court decisions
-IF THE CASE IS IMPORTANT TO THE COUNTRY.

Regarding the contention that all cases get docketed, that is not true. Cases can and are thrown out for a variety of reasons. This case was not. They receive thousands of cases a year and have to hone them down to approximately 80 cases. The FACT IS they have already heard us twice, giving us strong feedback that they likely consider this case to be of GREAT IMPORTANCE TO THE COUNTRY. Given that information, it would be unrealistic to assume that the court does NOT consider this case important or of interest. Additionally, as you have noted, Justice Ginsburg did deny our emergency motion to halt the inauguration and could have easily thrown out the writ at that time. BUT SHE DID NOT. She placed it on the docket. Additionally, I know of no rule that says all docketed cases move to conference. The court can do what ever they want with a case.

It was noted in the press that Melania Trump visited a court in Maryland, with no necessity, regarding a case she filed against a news outlet. The press widely reported this as they found it did appear she was making a statement by her very presence. Likewise, on the day of the decision to pass this case to conference, Ivanka Trump made an extended visit to the court, hearing apparently mundane cases with her daughter and visiting with court staff. This was reported in the news. It’s just an observation.

No one thought Brown vs Board had a chance either. Nor many of the great, landmark cases. We do not consider the naysayers important to the success or failure of the case, for the case will stand or fail on its own.

It is important, though, to understand that the education of the citizens on the fact that a revote is:
LEGALLY POSSIBLE, MORALLY MANDATED
to help them know the power of their vote, the power of their voice and the fact that if we do not regain control of our democracy and tainted voting system immediately, we have lost it all.

I know, that is a scary and hard thing to really understand. But it is true. The fact is, as a Ukrainian said to me this week, his having helped direct the cause which saved his country, “This is the only way out.” It really is. Learn more about it. Ask questions. We will have more information forthcoming.

The Congress and the President are BOTH implicated in this crime. We do not have car thieves investigate their own crimes. Likewise, it is unreasonable to think the congress can or will adequately investigate crimes to which they are complicit, either before or after the fact. That leaves the Supreme Court as the only valid investigative body left to us in this dire situation.

I hope you will have the decency to post this response and to address these points.
Thank you.
Revote2017

7 Responses to Response to PalmerReport article

Reblogged this on Abstractly Distracted and commented:
Thank you for your diligent work regardless of, or especially in response to, unmerited attacks. I understand this will happen as various outlets try to undermine rather than bolster your argument, but I appreciate your tenacity and unwavering commitment to this extremely important issue. Thank you!

People are criticizing you for such inane bs?? Let us not forget every american has the right to an attorney bc of a handwritten, barely legible argument sent to SCOTUS by a poor, uneducated man sitting in a Florida prison. If your writ wasn’t submitted in pencil, you’ve already got more going for you than he did! SCOTUS isn’t a lower court where they cast important issues aside in favor of technicalities. In other words, the wording of the writ is incredibly stupid to get onto you about. Ignore the trolls, even if they happen to sleep under liberal bridges 😉

Haa, thank you, from all of us. Yes, it is challenging enough without this but it is what it is. We do have the right to petition our government for relief. I believe we must fix this rapidly or our country is gone. And what will be left in its place is a dark thing, indeed. Thank you for the words of support!!

Thank you for posting this. I saw the thing on Palmerreport and wondered if this truly had been written off by the Justices. I cannot imagine any more important case right now for the Supreme Court to hear and I will be devastated and so disappointed in our Court system, if they don’t. I truly do believe this is the only way out of this mess. I just read tonight that my state, Arizona, had their primaries hacked and the evidence points to the Russians. If we do not get a new election, I don’t think we will ever regain democracy and I really find it hard to believe that the Supreme Court would want to set a precedence that it is okay to hack into the election, if they have the power to nullify. I am so grateful to the petitioners and I believe that miracles do happen and it is so true that other people think things don’t have a chance and then someone wins. I am praying and regardless of the result, I say thank you to these ladies for doing this.

This collaboration between Trump and Putin, this cyberattack on our country , scored a direct hit. Much better than a a nuclear warhead, it led to the installation of a Russian surrogate in our White House who immediately began dismantling our government agencies…EVERYTHING from the Dept. of Education, the EPA, the Dept. of Energy & foremost attacking our own intelligence agencies and free press.it is abundantly clear that certain fascist members of Congress must do everything to keep Trump in power or they will lose their protection- they will be caught and exposed as traitors. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were the last citizens tried & convicted of treason. They were executed in 1953. By comparison, their acts were minor, certainly , no harm came fromthem. In the present case, Trump and his cohorts, have aided & abetted the enemy. The attack was successful and the harm is compounding with each passing day.